Skip to main content

View Diary: GOP leadership 'outraged' by Obama's appointment of Richard Cordray (269 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  well let's look at facts shall we? (0+ / 0-)

    Who introduced the "pro forma" sessions? Democrats. Did bush appoint anyone during this time? No.

    Who introduced "extraordinary rendition"? Clinton. Not sure of he approves of the pro forma session or not.

    Now, who has further expanded the use of indefinite detention and warrentless wiretapping? Obama.

    So what strains credulity exactly?

    •  I would posit Bush had no appointments he deemed (0+ / 0-)

      politically or functionally necessary during the pro forma sessions, and that's why he refrained. Let's look at the facts, shall we? His administration took extreme liberties with Executive power when and to the extent he pleased -- even unilaterally abrogating the Geneva Conventions.

      And that is exactly why your contention strains credulity. All your other points, while true, are irrelevant.

      •  Very funny (0+ / 0-)

        You. "suppose". While I present facts. I have no idea why bush didn't appoint   But it is fact that he didn't. Reid himself pulled the same ploy so bush wouldn't make recess appointments. Obama supported the democrat maneuver. But now they make a plainly electioneering move which could have severe repercussions in the future. Rationalize all you want.

        And as for violating Geneva. I would be inclined to that opinion.  But that is all it is, an opinion.

        •  Your facts were irrelevant to your supposition (0+ / 0-)

          (pot meet kettle) that Bush 43 felt entirely free to torture, grossly violate Amend. IV, selectively suspend habeas corpus, and send tens of thousands of Americans off to death and injury in an Iraqi oil grab, BUT tricksssy Harry Reid's "pro forma session" maneuver left him soooooooo quaking in his Executive boots that he DARED not make recess appointments.

          It. doesn't. fly. Sorry.

          And I wonder what degree of torture you consider acceptable to the Geneva Conventions. I would be inclined to the opinion that you're a pretty scary guy.

          I'm done with this thread.

          •  OK (0+ / 0-)

            But you missed my point entirely. And I never said Bush didn't make a recess appointment because of Reid's pro forma sessions. (to quote me: "I have no idea why bush didn't appoint   But it is fact that he didn't.") So I do not know why you make that claim. However Reid himself said he DID that so as to keep bush from making recess appointments. I find it ironic and a dangerous precedent that Obama (who also endorsed the maneuver when Democrats used it) and Reid are now perfectly willing fly in the face of that precedent. I am sure this will come back to haunt us when the gop ignores senate sessions in the future.

            As for Geneva, I am merely saying that no one has been charged, much less convicted of crimes. Therefore I am of the "opinion".

            And if you are so outraged by Bush's unconstitutionality I am sure Obama's expansions of state power has you at least as worried?

            And no, I am not too scary.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site